Posts evicted from Sukhoi T-75 LTS (CheckMate) topic

[Galaxy]

so does it bounce off with the imaginary axis or not? Answer the question

Are you on drugs? Answer the question.

 

[EmoBirb]

How is any of the silly goober talk any of y'all are having related to T-75?

 

[Reddington777]

Some days I sure am glad that I live in a city that makes great popcorn...

I don't think anyone believes Russian hardware doesn't have great signature reductions nor are they somehow magnitudes stealthier than US or Chinese planes. What I see the past 3 pages to be is a lack of nuance from all parties - though a certain someone certainly more so than the others.

@Galaxy maybe avoid certain unqualified expressions like "all" or "always" or "X and is always and completely better than Y". You'd really expect there to be more discussion and nuance for these things. If you really worked at DARPA, I'd expect you to discuss with that kind of nuance too.

But by all means continue... I'm just getting to my bag of chocolate caramel ones...

 

[Arjen]

How is any of the silly goober talk any of y'all are having related to T-75?

Not related at all. Consider this thread's title as a clue:

Posts evicted from Sukhoi T-75 LTS (CheckMate) topic​

<reaches for popcorn>

 

[aim9xray]

<reaches for popcorn>

Hmm. Why don't we have a popcorn emoji for this august assemblage? Enquiring minds want to know.

 

[Reddington777]

<reaches for popcorn>

Surely you dont mean mine right? Only the buttery kind is left.

 

[donnage99]

Are you on drugs? Answer the question.

I asked you a follow up to your claim and you this is how you responded? On the other thread I showed that the outer walls are not platform aligned and what you drew was the alignment of the imaginary axis of the tilt of the engine. The physical nozzle itself are faceted at a different angle. You had no response to it. Only when I called you out on here for your fake resume about working on DARPA stealth project by bringing up you not having basic understanding such as mistaking platform alignment with alignment of an arbitrary and imaginary line you doubled down and now this is the answer you gave when cornered to answer for your previous statement.

Just like with the claims you made about composite structures, once called out by Quellish and Oversacqn you doubled down by using AI to search for technical papers then quoting from them without any full comprehension of them.

with that being said this whole thread is just several of us trying to deal with someone doing mental gymnastics to squirm and backpedaling out from clearly false statements. Mods maybe please consider closing it. I’m done responding to Galaxy

 

[Scott Kenny]

I was referring to thick composites as they add weight. Something like so called honeycomb composites. There are obviously thin and lightweight composites but that was not what I was referring too.

If you don't understand that honeycomb composites are literally 2-3 layers of eg fiberglass cloth on each side of the 90+% air of the internals, I can't help you. The thick part of the honeycomb composites is a material that looks like, well, honeycomb. It's ~6mm hexagons that are open air, with what could be aluminum foil as the cell walls.**

Thickness of a panel DOES NOT EQUAL weight!!

** And is aluminum foil honeycomb, in the case of Huey cockpit floors and Cessna 188 wing walks. Huey floors have very thin aluminum skins over the honeycomb, Cessna 188s have fiberglass. It's fiberglass or nomex honeycomb in passenger-plane floor panels, with fiberglass skins.

The source I posted cited over −40 dB reduction as well. Is that also insignificant? This is all subjective, -10db or -30db may not seem significant to you but it is to me as it could be the difference between staying undetected and being engaged by enemy fire.

-40dB is the levels the US was getting in the 1970s. So, F117 levels. Also, the rest of the Su-57's aircraft shaping suggests that the only focus for the RCS limits was head-on, much like the F-117 was.

So great, the Russians have finally caught up to where the Americans were in stealth engineering before I was born.

For a country with the greatest mathematical minds and training program for said minds in the world, they're not doing all that well at turning the math of RCS control into a physical object.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Topic locked. We've been down this road many times.